According to Knome, "Whole-genome sequencing decodes the 6 billion bits of information
that make up an individual’s genome. Unlike existing genome scanning or 'SNP chip' technologies that provide useful but limited information on
approximately 20 conditions, whole-genome sequencing allows for the
analysis of up to 2,000 common and rare conditions, and over 20,000
genes – numbers that are rapidly growing."

Jorge Conde, CEO of Knome, told EYE on DNA the advantage of Knome's approach over the competition: "We’re focusing on whole-genome sequencing now because we believe that this is the approach that will drive personal genomics forward. An advantage for us to being first is that, from inception, we’ve built our platform and services specifically around whole-genome
applications. And because we’re initially focusing on a limited number of clients, we can provide first-in-class service – customized and personalized to each individual client."

We've been hearing a lot lately about the $1,000 genome, which would make scanning affordable for the mass audience.

Knome co-founder George Church, the Harvard and MIT geneticist, told Gen-erocity he is still moving ahead with the non-profit Personal Genome Project (PGP) (www.personalgenomes.org).

Church said "The PGP is alive. We are in the process of cautiously expanding to 100,000 volunteers." The two projects may dovetail.

Knome is starting off more modestly in size, but not in price.

Meanwhile, Knome is looking for 20 people to kick off this effort. This is definitely for people who have everything and want the ultimate in self-knowledge Watson- and Venter-style.

Church said: "The Knome price is $350K for >95%
of the genome. The PGP is separate and has different goals -- a non-profit
aiming at research correlating questionnaires on environment ad traits with
sequence data on 1% of the genome. The hardware, software, wetware and human
data develop in the PGP are intended to be “open access” for anyone
(including companies) to see."

November 29, 2007

You've heard all about the just under $1,000 tests from Google-backed 23andme and deCODE, combining genetic results along with some genealogy and social networking. And then there's the $1,000 full genome tests, a ala James Watson and Craig Ventor, for the masses that are coming soon. (www.nature.com/embor/journal/v8/n10/full/7401070.html)

Now a geneticist, from the National Institutes of Health, no less, is offering a test that will have detect heart disease, cancer, diabetes and more. In the December issue of the American College of Physicians Observer, W. Gregory Feero, Md, PhD, says: "Genetic
testing is already available, practical—even reimbursable. Primary care
physicians don't have to wait for a huge leap in biotechnology for an
inexpensive and non-invasive genetic test that can today detect a two-
to threefold risk increase for diabetes, cardiovascular disease,
stroke, colorectal cancer, breast cancer and ovarian cancer. In some
individuals, the test can detect much higher disease risk for less
common disorders like hemochromatosis, thrombophilia, and alpha-1
antitrypsin deficiency." (acponline.org/journals/news/nov07/feero.htm)

Plus, he says the test is available for free online. That's nada, zip, zilch, And the results can be turned around in 20 minutes. The U.S. Surgeon General is offering it at familyhistory.hhs.gov

Feero says: "In a time of microarrays and talk of full genome sequencing, family
history remains a cornerstone of the concept of truly personalized
medicine, and seems likely to become even more useful in the near
future."

If you can afford the $1,000 genetic tests and have a need to know, by all all means, have at it. Meanwhile, the free family health portrait is a good starting point. If you need to social network, send a friend an e-mail.

November 23, 2007

Family historians love to find links to the famous and infamous.They're thrilled to find themselves in the lineage of some royal family or a NAP (Native American Princess).I guess I'm no different. But in my defense, and maybe yours, you can't control who you run into while pursuing your roots.While I was completing my old-fashioned "paper trail" of family history years ago, going back to the early 1700s in Lithuania, my son Adam asked me if I had found any royalty. He was stunned when I said I had--a link, albeit tenuous, to Saul Wahl, a rabbi who was tied in with the Lithuanian royal, Prince Nicholas Radziwill.Wahl (German for "election" Is there a Wolinsky/Wahl-insky tie?) supposedly was was named king of Poland for a day--Aug. 18, 1587--and improved the lot of Jews in the hood with various proclamations (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Wahl)My research in the Lithuanian Archives and in talking to my grandmother in fact led to two connections with the Radziwills--in their towns in Keidan and Slobodka, where the liberal-minded Radziwill (remember Jackie Kennedy's sister married into the family, so we have Kennedy Camelot roots as well) treated the Jews well. He invited Jews skilled in weaving, which I guess must have included my family back when,to live on his estates and protected them.

(I took this photo of a statue of the Prince in Keidan in summer 2007.)

My DNA roots have shown a link in the G Haplotype (specifically G5) with prominent Chicago attorney Newton Minow, the head of the Federal Communications Commission under JFK (double Camelot) (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_Minow) and the late actor James Franciscus, whose opus includes a Jackie K biopic in which he plays JFK (www.imdb.com/title/tt0082572) (triple Camelot) and even better "Beneath the Planet of the Apes."Not to forget the infamous: Christopher Knight, a distant genetic cousin, in a new book, "Son of Scarface" claims to be the grandson of Al Capone. (www.sonofscarface.com) Rat-a-tat-tat from my Chicago homeboy Scarface Al.Now with the glitz of Google backing and very smart marketing, 23and me is starting to attract the rich and famous, and the famous and rich, to spit into a jar and have their genomes tested for potential disease and also for their family roots. The always entertaining VC Guy Kawasaki describes in his blog How to Change the World attending a "spitting party" (http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2007/11/23andme-party.html, where actors Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell give up samples for the cause. Earlier this year, investor Warren "Berskshire Hathaway" zillionaire and singer entrepreneur Parrothead Jimmy "Magaritaville" "Let's Get Drunk and Screw" Buffett found they are not closely related, but do share ancient ancestors. (Check out postings on this from Blaine Bettinger's thegeneticgeneaologist at www.thegeneticgenealogist.com/2007/05/30/warren-buffet-jimmy-buffet-and-23andme-continued/)Celebrities and near celebrities are the new frontier in the increasingly competitive world of Genome-tainment: National Geographic's Genographic Project (www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic) landed comedian Stephen Colbert, as Spencer Wells, the Indiana Jones of popular genetics, explained discovering Colbert's apparently unknown Jewish roots. I could kvell. DNA Ancestry dnaancestry.com) landed Alex "Roots" Haley's nephew. (Check out guru Megan Smolenyak at www.rootstelevision.com/blogs/megans-rootsworld/2007/10/those_of_you_who_were.html) Haley found Irish roots on his paternal side (www.kutv.com/content/news/topnews/story.aspx?content_id=1a8ec79a-ed88-4f3f-9a0f-51b6c2941b15).Historian Henry Louis "Skip" Gates Jr., who just launched African DNA www.africandna.com/?gclid=CKWmgJu1848CFRgXIwod1GVqFg), already has done Oprah's DNA and wrote "Finding Oprah's Roots" (www.amazon.com/Finding-Oprahs-Roots-Your-Own/dp/0307382389).Star power can only help popularize and make mainstream the up-to-now admittedly nerdy world of genetic testing for family history.But watch out who you match. Do any of the DNA firms have Britney's DNA? Or how about Paris'? Or Lindsay's? How about Hitler's? (Confession:I hear I match Stalin's grandson's DNA--very distant.)And with family history and no doubt genetic material popping up in the political realm, such as the Cheney-Obama link, will people starting voting their genes? If you can't trust family, who can you trust?

November 21, 2007

Back in 2000, I was among the first to pay to have my DNA tested for genealogical reasons. Some of you may know me as Kit No. 65 at Family Tree DNA.

My only goal was tracking roots, sometimes very deep roots going back to Africa, where this whole modern human enterprise began tens of thousands of years ago.

It's been fascinating. I have learned a little bit about genetics and in recent years have started to match people with whom I shared a grandparent thousands, even hundreds, of years ago.

I wanted a sense of where my family came from, to trace the migratory pattern from Africa, through ancient Palestine, maybe Italy and Germany and then a right turn onto Lithuania, Latvia and Ukraine and eventually on to the USA.

I have met and become friends with a number of people who share this interest, some might say an obsession, along with some common genes.With this personal research, genetic diseases were lurking in the background, but were not center stage. Companies like FTDNA (www.familytreedna.com) avoided medical implications of DNA--it was all just family fun, so to speak. And loads of companies have piled on to go tell us about our ancestry.

But now new companies are entering the field, including Iceland-based deCODE genetics (decodeme.com)and Google-backed 2andme (23andme.com) to take genetics to a new level, combining the latest research genetic diseases and family history with a Web-based delivery system.

Will genetics be a new entertainment concept? How about a game show, Name Those Genes,hosted by James Watson, my South Side Chicago homeboy, where contestants have their genome and pedigree taken apart, really ripped apart, by a pro?

In fact, the Killer In Me, a UK TV show, looks at the genetic risks faced by a high-profile panel. (www.itv.com/Lifestyle/KillerInMe/default.html) Will heart disease knock off a retired footballer turned commentatoe? Will a TV news reader develop early Alzheimer's? Inquiring minds want to know.

Sound like fun to you? That's genome-tainment in the age of reality TV. And now everyday people with a $1,000 burning in their pockets can find out about themselves, including their Killers In Them. Will it save lives? Will the information be abused? What about genetic information ruining an individual's insurance rating, a major concern in these United States.

Plug a name into Google and you can get a phone number, an address and maybe even a Candid Camera-like photo of the person standing in front of his house or sitting in her window with her cat. Plug in a stock ticker and Google serve up the latest price. Will we soon plug in a gene marker into Google and find out what diseases we have or might get along with a listing of other people with the same condition so we can form an instant online support group? See you at MyGene at MySpace or Genebook at Facebook so we can "social network." Will the public overinterpret or misinterpret these tests?

In the San Jose Mercury News, Stanford law prof Hank Greely, who has been taking shots at the genetic testing companies, warns that the best of intentions with this testing could cause problems: "A lot of the genetic results are early, weak and preliminary. One worries that people will think the information is more
powerful than it actually is and change their lives based on it."(www.mercurynews.com/google/ci_7513189?nclick_check=1)

New York Times genetics beat reporter Amy Harmon was scanned by 23andme and got a glimpse at her personal genome and found:"My risk of breast cancer was no higher than average, as was my chance
of developing Alzheimer’s. I was 23 percent less likely to get Type 2 diabetes than most people. And my chance of being paralyzed by multiple sclerosis, almost nil. I was three times more likely than the average person to get Crohn's disease, but my odds were still less than one in a hundred." (www.nytimes.com/2007/11/17/us/17dna.html?ex=1352955600&en=e7fcc2972b0a540c&ei=5089&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rss)

Personally, I believe we should get as much information as we can to prevent what we can prevent. I also believe in sharing that data.

When I had a heart attack at age 57, despite being a non-smoking exerciser on a low-fat diet, it was a shock. But the steps I had taken to be healthy over the years no doubt help save my life and minimize the damage. At the suggestion of my cardiologist, I shared my story in a newspaper article in the Chicago Sun-Times, where I have worked for a quarter decade, with the hope it would help others.

We've are entering a Brave New World of genetic information. Let's hunt the Killers In Us, with our eyes open and the knowledge that while our fate in not only in our genes but in the way we live our lives.